Posted on 08/10/2010 5:20:59 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Over twenty-five percent of Americans, say that President Obama's 49th birthday is not this week. A poll called “where were you really born that day?” summoned this up into question.
The persistent theory boosted heavily by conservative activists that Obama was not born in Hawaii, but that he was born outside of the country of the U.S. The CNN/Opinion research Corp. survey said 27 percent of responsive people doubt that Obama's father is telling the truth or that his birth certificate is real. 42% have no doubts, 29% said he probably was born in Hawaii, but couldn't give a sure answer. Democrats backed Obama more than Republicans. 14 percent of Republicans said he was NOT born in the United States. This issue began over Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign and has become a topic of interest with Rush Limbaugh and the so called 'Birther' movement. Hawaii has already released a “certified” copy of Obama's birth certificate. The 1961 archives of two local newspapers in Hawaii also show his birth announcements! Snopes.com has also checked into it.
Related Sources:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
You were doing okay until you brought out this old bit of birther fantasy.
So, in the end, you consider that the law (the constitution) cannot stand against a misinterpretation of the law? He got away with it - so the actual content and intent of the law matters naught? Your argument says that the fact that he was installed makes the foundation of the office moot - his qualifications don't matter, because someone said he was President.
I hope we have more of the rule of law in us than that, honestly.
You, too, have no right to demand obeisance to your opinion.
Not necessarily. You better check the law on birth out of wedlock.
Bingo, and Team Obama wishes now to thank Orly Taitz and WND
You are conveniently ignoring the Constitutional mechanisms for removing a President. No one on this planet, including you, can now declare him not to be President. Who would that be? The Supreme Court, the Congress, the Park Police, Simon? It can’t be done as a matter of law. The Senate, however, could act on an article of Impeachment delivered by the House stating that the President was ineligible for office and therefore should be removed. The Senate could hold a trial and remove him. I just don’t know of any other mechanism, including one that I have heard that suggested that it be done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. That’s called a military Coup d’Etat and I don’t think that will happen.
What is the mechanism for removing usurpers, if not through impeachment?
Unlike others, I am making no such demand. You, and all the others can freely reject my opinion. I'm not presenting it as fact, and I'm not suggesting that its the only one allowed.
If remedies other than impeachment are available to us at this point, I'd like to know what they are. I've heard some doozies: The D.C. police, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Federal Marshals, but I don't know of anything except impeachment that could stand Constitutional scrutiny. If you have any ideas, I'd like to hear them.
He does have a team of lawyers challenging efforts to release records. Are they working Pro Bono?
Faulty Premise. If one is "Natural Born Citizen" that status cannot be removed by adoption, or traveling on a foreign passport.
The notion that qualification as a natural born citizen requires that both parents be citizens is very much a minority opinion. Very few jurists, legal scholars, or politicians believe this to be true.
Ditto. (a) Jurists, legal scholars, and politicians are wildly different beasts. (b)No one has ever polled them.
Courts have avoided the issue like the plague. I predict the issue will resurface with a vengeance in 2012.
You are missing a key concept in British law and that is the one of legitimacy. British citizenship law was quite complicated.
You can start with scrolling down to the definitions section of the Act.
“It’s one that promulgated by a lot of people “
A good PR campaign, then, if it can pull in lots of people who repeat it.
DeBeers hired Edward Bernays a while back to bolster diamond sales. He came up with the idea to make a diamond the ONLY stone a man could give a woman when they got married. This public relations campaign is now part of American culture (and for all I know Europe too). DeBeers still spends money on it, but it is maintained individually every time some guy brings The Rock in to the shop to show The Guys, and then the girl shows The Rock to her Gal-Pals. Very few choose a ruby or Tanzanite, a diamond is the vastly socially accepted gemstone for engagements. All fom a public relations/opinion shaping project.
There is a readily available set of “facts” about Obama that is used to support the various birth theories, and lots of people repeat them. Snopes and FactCheck are thankfully coming under increased skepticism.
There is more physical evidence that he was born in Kenya then the adoption in Indonesia.
Video of his grandma stating she was present
Article in Kenyan newspaper in 2004 states he was born in Kenya.
Statement in Kenyan parliament transcript that he was born in Kenya.
I believe that you are correct on this point. The issue is whether, if and when he took positive action to affirm his foreign citizenship after attaining majority, he surrendered his original citizenship status.
Whatever the courts might rule, I bet the ranch that he and his political handlers did not want this issue known to the American public before the election.
No I'm not. The Constitution clearly states: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." It says nothing about usurpers.
You are ignoring the requirement that in order to be President, one must be a natural born citizen, over 35 and a resident of the US for 14 years.
Since the courts have been delegated the power to try "all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority", it would seem to fall to them to determine if someone meets the requirements, or the meaning of the Natural Born Citizen" term. So far they have declined to do so, despite the many attempts to get them to do their job.
I’m beginning to think President Obama wasn’t born...but is in fact an extra-terrestrial that got loose from Area 51.
Or, he was assembled from body parts in the former Soviet Union. They used a clone of Karl Marx for the brain.
If he was born out of wedlock, and had no acknowledged father, and was born in Hawaii, then he might be natural born. The problem is that he did have an acknowledged father, or so he claims. Generally, especially in cases where the mother did know the father was already married, the law treats the children as legitimate, even though the marriage was not valid. thus in this case, as the child of an alien.
If born outside the US, an out of wedlock child of a US Citizen mother is a citizen at birth, but since that is due to statute law, such a child, like the child of one alien and one citizen parent (born outside the US) is considered naturalized at birth, not natural born, or so the Supreme Court says in the latter case at least.
True, but you have to weigh all of the evidence and come to a conclusion. I just haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that a massively pregnant teenager would, in 1961, travel all the way to Kenya to deliver a child when it seems likely that the only real role of the father in all of this was the impregnation event. I could be wrong, of course.
The testimony of his family and representations of the Kenyan Parliament do have be taken with a grain of salt.
As the sitting de facto POTUS, whether originally eligible or not, he cannot be removed except by Impeachment in the House and Conviction in the Senate. Of course, he could resign. Neither is likely.
It is this unpleasant set of facts that is causing about 25% of Americans massive "Cognitive Dissonance," that can only get worse in the remaining years of the prepostor's term.
BTW, Team Obama's attorneys are NOT working pro bono. No one will ever know how much this has cost George Soros, but the officially admitted number is now verging on $1.5 Million+.
At this time the actions for Writs of Quo Warranto which, on appeal to the SCOTUS by either side, might definitively establish what a "Natural Born Citizen" is, once and for all, are stalled in the federal district court of Washingon, DC, which is the only court in the land Constitutionally empowered to hear the case.
No matter what they, or the SCOTUS decide, the actual removal can only be accomplished by Congress through, again, impeachment and conviction.
The supreme irony is that Obama is now protected by the very Constitution he deconstructed.
Obama Sr was not a US citizen. He was not domiciled in the US. The US immigration law does not govern whether Obama was a British citizen at birth if born in the US. It is the British law that is relevant.
Well, I think that the courts would opine that if Obama has misrepresented his eligibility for office, that would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor.
I can’t say whether your opinion or mine has more merit, but I’m very fond of mine.
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.